Video

 

Six Reasons You Should Avoid Dairy at all Costs (VIDEO)

youtube.com | 05/24/10

  • digg
  • Delicious
  • Furl
  • reddit
  • blinklist
  • Technorati
  • stumbleupon

Read More: dairy, mark hyman, milk

Get VegSource Alerts Get VegSource Alerts

First Name

Email

Email This Story to a Friend




Got milk? Plenty of people think its perfectly healthy to drink, and advertisements would have you eating dairy all the time. But it may not be as healthy as you think. In this weeks UltraWellness blog Dr. Mark Hyman gives six reasons you should avoid milk and explains why it may be at the very root of your health problems.

Dr. Hyman is a smart guy, though we don't agree 100% with his recommendations (e.g., we don't recommend any seafoods or other animal products as a source of calcium or anything else).

=SCROLL DOWN TO WATCH VIDEO=

 




FACEBOOK COMMENTS:


11 Comments | Leave a comment

user-pic

Wow. What an excellent summation of the key points!

He talks fast so one has to listen carefully but every word counts. It's concise and in layman's terms, so easy to understand. Well done!

user-pic

Dr Hyman gives a great argument for removing milk from the diet.

It's amazing the response when you show people exactly how much calcium can be obtained from a vegetarian diet high in nuts, seeds and leafy greens. Calcium that is completely free of animal hormones, has good quantities of fibre thrown in the mix and generally will be promoting an alkaline internal environment.

The dairy marketing machine appears to have been quite successful in making many of us believe that dairy is the only source of calcium.

user-pic

Regarding vegetarianism vs. veganism, man is the only species that drinks the milk of another species. All other species drink the milk of the mothers of their own species until they are weaned. Cow's milk is the perfect food—IF you're a baby calf!

To mass produce cow's milk on a large scale via factory farming, cows have to be kept continually pregnant, giving birth, and lactating. The cows are genetically bred to produce excess cow's milk for humans. Male cows (bulls) are useless to the dairy industry, so they become veal. By supporting the dairy industry, one indirectly supports cow killing.

In a posting entitled "humane dairy??" appearing on AlterNet on August 22, 2009, provoked writes:

"Of course it is impossible to source any 'humane cheese' or dairy --- In order to be economically viable the females must be kept constantly impregnated. This is a traumatic and painful procedure... The industry calls the restraining mechanism 'the rape rack'. The cow also endures pain at birth as any animal does. Her calf is separated from her at only a few days/hours old. This causes immense distress as the milk was intended for her baby. Her baby depending on sex is either female and placed within the herd (if needed) or sent to slaughter immediately with undesirable male calves. The 'lucky' male calves get to spend a few months in a dark box, fed an anemic diet then sent to slaughter. There is absolutely no way that 'humane dairy' can ever exist. www.humanemyth.org "

Back in 1987, when I enjoyed access to USENET (a nationwide computer network linking universities, think tanks, corporations, military bases, etc.), I argued for religious vegetarianism. Someone claimed humans are omnivores, saying we've been hunting since the days of the caveman, etc. I responded by quoting the anatomical comparisons found in The Higher Taste (the original 1983 edition) claiming humans are herbivores.

Dave Butler of Tektronix in Oregon (whose main claim to fame is having coined the pro-choice slogan "Not even close" in 1986) said that humans are not herbivores--the human body can't break down cellulose (the principal component of plant foods, though it does serve a purpose as dietary fiber). Dave said further that historically mankind has been omnivorous, and that there's also the problem of obtaining enough Vitamin B-12 on a vegan diet.

Miriam Nadel, a Jewish vegetarian in Southern California, listed examples of humans living mainly on plant foods, and said that as far as Vitamin B-12 is concerned, most vegetarians get their Vitamin B-12 through eggs and dairy products.

"Exactly," responded Dave Butler. "And these are vegetarians--not herbivores."

I no longer make the argument (based on The Higher Taste) that humans are herbivores. Rather, I argue we resemble the other primates (frugivores). We're designed to live predominately, if not entirely, upon plant foods. Yet everywhere I go, I encounter meat-eaters, like brainwashed zombies, blindly quoting Dave Butler, saying "Exactly," as if we're still living in 1987.

As Dave himself used say, "Silly is a state of mind. Stupid is a way of life."

Humans are not natural omnivores, either; to agree that humans are natural omnivores would be to play right into the hands of the meat-eaters.

The meat-eaters, especially, "exactly," are ready to find fault with vegetarians in this regard: do we love all animals, or only some animals (e.g., cows) and not others? And if we really do love the cows, why do we contribute to their death and suffering just to drink their milk?

Can children be raised without cow's milk? YES! Half the world's population (blacks and Asians in particular) are lactose intolerant, and can't digest milk after infancy. Dr. Michael Klaper has written books on vegan nutrition, pregnancy, and childbirth.

Vegetarians DO cause far less cruelty than meat-eaters, but a nonviolent philosophy would carry greater weight from vegans.

One of the first books I read on the subject of vegetarianism while in college was A Vegetarian Sourcebook by Keith Akers (1983). Describing the environmental damage caused by raising animals for food: topsoil erosion, deforestization, loss of groundwater, etc. as well as the economic inefficiency and waste of energy and resources in raising animals for food in an age of exploding human population growth, Keith Akers foreshadowed John Robbins' Diet for a New America (1987), which was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize.

In A Vegetarian Sourcebook, Keith Akers writes:

"Using grasslands for livestock agriculture creates great environmental problems, which greatly limit its usefulness. Grazing systems require ten times more land than feedlot agriculture, in which animals are simply given feed grown on cropland. Grazing systems have to be extensive in order to avoid the catastrophic consequences of overgrazing—which renders a piece of land unsuitable for any purpose.

"Overgrazing and the consequent soil erosion are extremely serious problems worldwide. By the most conservative estimates, 60% of all U.S. rangelands are overgrazed, with billions of tons of soil lost each year. Overgrazing has also been the greatest cause of man-made deserts.

"Even if we grant grazing a role in a resource-efficient, ecologically stable agriculture, milk should be the end result, not beef. Milk provides over 50% of the protein and nearly four times the calories of beef, per unit of forage resources from grazing.

"'When only forage is available, then egg, broiler and pork production are eliminated and only milk, beef, and lamb production are viable systems,' state David and Marcia Pimentel, scientists and authors of Food, Energy and Society. "Of these three, milk production is the most efficient.'

"An ecologically stable, resource-efficient system of grazing animals for human food could not be anything faintly resembling today's livestock agriculture. It would be a smaller, decentralized, less intensive system of animal husbandry devoted to milk production."

This is what the Vedas (Hindu scriptures) say as well: an acre of land, a cow and a bull, and you're all set! The Vedas also warn that when a population is sinful, their land becomes a desert...and overgrazing does lead to topsoil erosion, which in turn leads to desertification. So it may be possible to have animal agriculture (devoted solely to milk production) on a small scale—like in ISKCON or the Amish. But the rest of humanity, with an exploding population in the billions, will have to be vegan.

According to A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada:

"Real philosophy is nothing more than this: friendliness to all living entities." Elsewhere, Srila Prabhupada writes, "If people are to be educated in the path back to Godhead, they must be taught first and foremost to stop the process of animal-killing."

Similarly, in his purport to the Srimad Bhagavatam 6.10.9, Srila Prabhupada writes: "One cannot continue killing animals and at the same time be a religious man. That is the greatest hypocrisy. Jesus Christ said, 'Do not kill,' but hypocrites nevertheless maintain thousands of slaughterhouses while posing as Christians. Such hypocrisy is condemned..."

And:

"If one kills many thousands of animals in a professional way so that other people can purchase the meat to eat, one must be ready to be killed in a similar way in his next life and life after life. There are many rascals who violate their own religious principles. According to Judeo-Christian scriptures, it is clearly said, 'Thou shalt not kill.' Nonetheless, giving all kinds of excuses, even the heads of religions indulge in killing animals while trying to pass as saintly persons. This mockery and hypocrisy in human society brings about unlimited calamities; therefore occasionally there are great wars. Masses of such people go out onto battlefields and kill themselves. Presently, they have discovered the atomic bomb, which is simply waiting to be used for wholesale destruction." (Chaitanya Charitamrita, Madhya 24.251, purport)

According to the editors of World Watch, July/August 2004: "The human appetite for animal flesh is a driving force behind virtually every major category of environmental damage now threatening the human future--deforestization, topsoil erosion, fresh water scarcity, air and water pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, social injustice, the destabilization of communities and the spread of disease."

Brother David Steindl-Rast, a Benedictine monk, similarly writes in the February 1995 issue of Harmony: Voices for a Just Future, a peace and justice periodical on the religious Left: "...the survival of our planet depends on our sense of belonging--to all other humans, to dolphins caught in dragnets to pigs and chickens and calves raised in animal concentration camps, to redwoods and rainforests, to kelp beds in our oceans, and to the ozone layer."

user-pic

Dr. Hyman made the claim the Osteoporosis is more prevalent in western countries that consume milk, and less common is Asia/Africa but according to the International Osteoporosis Foundation, this is simply not true: http://www.elements4health.com/osteoporosis-a-serious-and-growing-problem-throughout-asia.html

user-pic

That article states that osteoporosis has increased dramatically in eastern countries over the past 15 to 30 years.

Of note is that this coincides with the period of their development in which their diets have been increasingly westernized.

user-pic

This is simply false. The Asian Audit first of all is not a published study. There's no peer review involved, so to put it at the same level as published studies which say the opposite is having very low scientific standards indeed.

The Asian Audit, to the extent that it's accurate, would seem to show a trend that as Eastern (but not African, as you claim) countries shift toward westernized, animal-based diets, their risk of osteoporosis increases. But this is well know, when Asians migrate to the US, they adopt the same risk as everyone here who is eating that diet. It's not genes, it's the animal food, low vitamin D, lack of exercise.

The point Dr. Hyman correctly makes is that increased consumption of animal protein, including from dairy products, leads to increased osteoporosis. I could give you a few dozen cites on that -- which were peer reviewed and published.

user-pic

In The tao of health sex and longevity (Daniel reid, 1989), in the Diet and nutrition chapter, is a rather extensive (as compared to the other types of food described) description of milk and why you should absolutely refrain from anything but raw fresh milk consumed by itself (i.e. not combined with anything else).

He describes a rather interesting experiment with cats, two control groups, one gets fresh milk, the other pasteurized. The "fresh milk" cats thrived, while the pasteurized milk drinking group ended the experiment prematurely, because at a certain point all kittens were stillborn and/or the still living cats were all sterile.

Since entire countries began drinking pasteurized or sterilized milk, and raw milk is generally not available or not legal to sell, fertility problems in the human population have began to take on very serious proportions... go figure. Wonder why that would be.

Where I live (the netherlands) drinking raw, whole milk is discouraged because of the health risks, well, that's good advice I must say, but from the wrong angle. Namely the "got milk" nonsense for processed dairy (which is far worse than raw) is just as bad here, we call it "Melk, de witte motor" (Milk, the white engine). Every time I see that now it makes me laugh :)

Ok, actually it's not very funny to see such commercialized slow mass-poisoning without anyone seeming to have a clue how dangerous it really is.

user-pic

I agree Gleam. There are significant risks associated with humans drinking the milk of other species, either raw or pasteurized.

Pasteurization was an attempt to eliminate the risks of raw milk, which it does, but in the process, causes a different set of problems.


user-pic

Seems like a choice between two evils then. However I think that when you have a clean body and strong immune system, drinking raw milk is not so dangerous, much like eating raw eggs. Only in a "natural" situation, finding a raw egg might prove less of a problem than milking that wild yak grazing nearby, which entirely proves your point of the "significant risk" of drinking milk from other species ;)

Anyway, my choice would be more like spinach juice, cheers!

user-pic

Exactly. The choice is between two evils ONLY when one assumes milk must be consumed. There is usually a third choice, and spinach juice is definitely preferable! :-)

user-pic

Great summation. Needs clarification on a few points, though. Calcium is not needed to build up human bones. Please read "Biological Transmutation" by Dr. Kirvran to learn how potassium, magnesium and silica-containing foods pick up hydrogen, oxygen and carbon in the human body and turn into bone calcium. Women should never take calcium supplementation. We spill calcium before having a heart attack because it does nothing except build up plaque inside our arteries and outside our bones. Alcohol is the most acid substance we can put in our bodies that is sold as a beverage. Spinach causes gallstones and because it is a selfish green, it will bind not only the iron in it to itself, but will rob the iron from other foods eaten at the same time. Annmarie Colbins "Foods That Heal" teaches more.

Leave a comment